A. On June 28, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the instant building from C as of June 29, 2019 by setting the deposit amount of KRW 40,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,800,000, and the period of June 29, 2019.

B. On December 26, 2018, the Plaintiff sub-leases the instant building to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 4,000,000, and the period from January 10 to January 9, 2019 (hereinafter “instant sub-lease”) and received KRW 20,000,000 as deposit money from the Defendant.

C. The Defendant paid only rent to the Plaintiff by July 9, 2019.

The defendant operated the Chinese restaurant in the building of this case by June 30, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Claims and requests;

A. On the ground of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent, the Plaintiff terminated the instant sub-lease by serving a copy of the instant complaint on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency, and sought payment of the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent in proportion to KRW 4,00,000 per month from July 2019 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building.

B. The Defendant’s assertion and counterclaim claim is that the instant sub-lease was terminated by C on the ground that it was an unauthorized substitute, and thus, the instant sub-lease was rejected by the Plaintiff’s rejection of the Plaintiff’s rent and request for delivery, as well as the Defendant’s claim for payment of deposit KRW 20,000,000 and damages for delay from June 14, 2019.

3. Judgment on the main claim

A. The grounds and timing for the termination of the sub-lease of this case are established when one of the parties agrees to allow the other party to use the subject-matter and make profits therefrom, and the other party agrees to pay a rent for it (see Article 618 of the Civil Act). Even if the lessor does not have ownership and other rights to lease the subject matter, the lease is effective.

Therefore, the lessor is therefore.